Synthetic supplier invoice approval
A non-operational example for discussing the schema. It labels a fictional training-fixture invoice and does not authorize any payment or represent a real accounts-payable policy.
Synthetic example: This document is for
schema and authoring tests. It is not a policy, authorization, or instruction to perform an
external action.
- Pack ID
https://example.invalid/judgment-packs/supplier-invoice-approval- Pack version
0.1.0- Outcomes
- 4
- Rules
- 3
Guide to this example
Focus: A business approve / manual-review / escalate / reject decision gated on evidence.
The checked-in document is expected to pass JPS carrier, structural, and semantic document checks. The edge and failure notes below are inspection prompts or scratch-copy exercises; they do not assert a portable evaluator result.
What this example demonstrates
A synthetic accounts-payable pack with applicability, three required evidence items, a cited source, four outcomes, exact-match and compound rules, a suspected-duplicate exception, a manual-review fallback, and explicit escalation.
Good for
- Seeing how required evidence, a variance threshold, and a restricted-supplier check combine into one automatic-approval decision.
- Tracing every outcome, evidence, and source id from its declaration to each local reference.
- Contrasting the automatic approve path with the manual-review, escalate, and reject paths in one document.
Edges to inspect
- Only context=training-fixture is applicable; any other context is outside the example's declared scope.
- A restricted supplier rejects and a variance above the declared tolerance escalates; both outrank the automatic path in the informative model.
- With all required evidence present, an in-tolerance invoice from a non-restricted supplier follows the automatic approve path.
- A suspected-duplicate flag forces manual review; missing required evidence instead requests the configured handoff.
Failure paths
- In a scratch copy, remove the goods-receipt evidence declaration while keeping a reference to it; the document keeps a valid JSON shape but must fail semantic document conformance.
- Point fallbackOutcome at an undeclared outcome id to produce a dangling-reference semantic failure.
- Approve, escalate, and reject are only display labels; never treat them as authorization to pay, hold, or refuse a real invoice.
Keep the layers separate. A malformed carrier, a
schema-shape failure, and a dangling local reference fail at different document-conformance layers.
Missing evidence, unknown facts, conflicts, and no-match handling belong to the informative
resolution experiment because JPS 0.1.0-draft defines no evaluator conformance class.
Annotated document
The complete validated pack. Each highlighted key links to its definition on the right — click a key to see what it means and its allowed values.
{
"specVersion": "0.1.0-draft",
"id": "https://example.invalid/judgment-packs/supplier-invoice-approval",
"version": "0.1.0",
"title": "Synthetic supplier invoice approval",
"description": "A non-operational example for discussing the schema. It labels a fictional training-fixture invoice and does not authorize any payment or represent a real accounts-payable policy.",
"decision": {
"intent": "Determine whether a fictional supplier invoice may be automatically approved, sent to manual review, escalated, or rejected in a training-fixture context.",
"question": "Should this supplier invoice be approved automatically?"
},
"applicability": {
"op": "fact",
"path": "/invoice/context",
"operator": "equals",
"value": "training-fixture"
},
"evidenceRequirements": [
{
"id": "purchase-order",
"description": "An invented matching purchase order for the fictional invoice.",
"required": true,
"kind": "document"
},
{
"id": "goods-receipt",
"description": "An invented goods receipt confirming the fictional order was received in full.",
"required": true,
"kind": "document"
},
{
"id": "tax-information",
"description": "The required tax information for the fictional supplier and invoice.",
"required": true,
"kind": "fact"
}
],
"sources": [
{
"id": "invoice-policy",
"title": "Fictional supplier invoice approval checklist",
"publisher": "Example Learning Lab",
"publishedAt": "2026-07-01",
"locator": {
"kind": "uri",
"value": "https://example.invalid/checklists/supplier-invoice-approval"
},
"citation": {
"location": "Illustrative approval section",
"excerpt": "An invoice with a matching purchase order, a complete goods receipt, required tax information, and an amount within tolerance may follow the automatic path. Restricted suppliers are rejected."
},
"rights": "Invented content for specification testing; not an operational policy."
}
],
"outcomes": [
{
"id": "approve",
"label": "Approve",
"description": "The invented evidence and declared rules support the automatic path in the fictional scenario."
},
{
"id": "manual-review",
"label": "Manual review",
"description": "An accountable accounts-payable reviewer must decide."
},
{
"id": "escalate",
"label": "Escalate",
"description": "The fictional variance exceeds the declared threshold and needs a person to look at it."
},
{
"id": "reject",
"label": "Reject",
"description": "The fictional supplier is marked restricted."
}
],
"rules": [
{
"id": "restricted-supplier",
"description": "Reject the fictional invoice when its supplier is marked restricted.",
"when": {
"op": "fact",
"path": "/supplier/restricted",
"operator": "equals",
"value": true
},
"outcome": "reject",
"onUnknown": "escalate",
"evidenceRequirementRefs": [
"tax-information"
],
"sourceRefs": [
"invoice-policy"
],
"rationale": "The example checklist rejects invoices from restricted suppliers."
},
{
"id": "variance-over-tolerance",
"description": "Escalate the fictional invoice when its amount variance exceeds the declared tolerance.",
"when": {
"op": "fact",
"path": "/invoice/variancePercent",
"operator": "greater-than",
"value": "2.5"
},
"outcome": "escalate",
"onUnknown": "escalate",
"evidenceRequirementRefs": [
"purchase-order"
],
"sourceRefs": [
"invoice-policy"
],
"rationale": "The example checklist sends variances above the tolerance to a person."
},
{
"id": "standard-invoice",
"description": "Approve a supported fictional invoice within tolerance when all required evidence is present and the supplier is not restricted.",
"when": {
"op": "all",
"conditions": [
{
"op": "fact",
"path": "/invoice/variancePercent",
"operator": "less-than-or-equal",
"value": "2.5"
},
{
"op": "not",
"condition": {
"op": "fact",
"path": "/supplier/restricted",
"operator": "equals",
"value": true
}
},
{
"op": "evidence-present",
"evidenceRequirement": "purchase-order"
},
{
"op": "evidence-present",
"evidenceRequirement": "goods-receipt"
},
{
"op": "evidence-present",
"evidenceRequirement": "tax-information"
}
]
},
"outcome": "approve",
"onUnknown": "escalate",
"evidenceRequirementRefs": [
"purchase-order",
"goods-receipt",
"tax-information"
],
"sourceRefs": [
"invoice-policy"
],
"rationale": "Ordinary supported invoices within tolerance may follow the automatic path."
}
],
"exceptions": [
{
"id": "suspected-duplicate",
"description": "A fictional invoice flagged as a suspected duplicate requires human review.",
"when": {
"op": "fact",
"path": "/invoice/duplicateSuspected",
"operator": "equals",
"value": true
},
"effect": "force-outcome",
"outcome": "manual-review",
"onUnknown": "escalate"
}
],
"fallbackOutcome": "manual-review",
"escalation": {
"triggers": [
"not-applicable",
"missing-required-evidence",
"unknown",
"conflict",
"no-match"
],
"target": {
"kind": "human-role",
"name": "Accounts payable reviewer"
},
"message": "Review only synthetic training inputs: the invoice, the matching purchase order, the goods receipt, tax information, the cited checklist, missing evidence, and conflicting rules; do not release any payment."
},
"metadata": {
"authors": [
"Judgment Pack Specification contributors"
],
"createdAt": "2026-07-22T00:00:00Z",
"license": "Apache-2.0"
}
}